Anton Piller Orders

Bavaria Autohaus (1997) Ltd. v Beck, 2011 ABQB 727

  • November 23, 2011

Date: 2011-11-23 Donald Lee J. | Link

Claim alleges that former employee Beck logged into Bavaria Autohaus' system to export private and confidential information about Bavaria's customers, potential customers, sales data and deals. Bavaria sought an ex parte injunction and an Anton Piller order. At para 22 the Court acknowledges some deficiencies in the application for the Anton Piller, but grants it nevertheless given the need to protect private customer data.

Brunswick News Inc. v. Langdon, 2007 NBQB 423 (CanLII)

  • October 03, 2007

Date: 2007-10-03 Docket: S/C/549/07 Peter S. Glennie J. | Link
Reasons for granting an application for an injunction against the use of proprietary and confidential information and an Anton Piller order. Nice review of the law up to October 2007 on Anton Piller orders.

Celanese Canada Inc. v. Murray Demolition Corp., 2006 SCC 36 (CanLII)

  • July 27, 2006

Date: 2006-07-27 Docket: 30652. Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish and Charron JJ. | Link

Headnotes from Supreme Court of Canada: "Civil procedure - Anton Piller order - Requirements for order - Guidelines for preparation and execution of order." (head notes) Defines the fundamental purpose of an Anton Piller order as "the preservation of relevant evidence". (para 31)

CIBC World Markets v. Genuity Capital Markets, 2006 CanLII 11908 (ON S.C.)

  • April 06, 2006

Date: 2006-04-06 Docket: 05-CL-5716. J.M. Farley J. | Link

"If there are aspects of that index (which would be a public document in a report – upon an equivalent AP [Anton Pillar] (SIC) order execution which this process is to mirror) which contain truly irrelevant material to the dispute – and which the defendants for personal reasons would prefer not to be on the public record, then a motion could be brought to have the full index sealed and an expurgated one provided for the public record which contains information which is clearly not irrelevant. In that regard reference may be had to Knight v. KPMG LLP, (1999), 20 C.B.R. (4th) 258. If the parties were able to agree as to irrelevant aspects, this may well be of significance to the hearing judge. "

Design Group Staffing Inc. v. Fierlbeck, 2008 ABQB 35 (CanLII)

  • January 15, 2008

Date: 2008-01-15 Docket: 0603 02889 ; 0601 05676  Frans F. Slatter JCQBA. | Link
Application to set aside an Anton Piller order. Defendant was working as an IT consultant developing applications for the Alberta Treasury Branches and was dismissed after a dispute.

Dish Network LLC v. Ramkissoon, 2010 ONSC 773 (CanLII)

  • February 23, 2010

Date: 2010-02-23 Docket: 09-8091-00CL Cumming J. | Link

Findings of contempt resulting from the defendant's hiding of disk drives, deletion of information and general lack of cooperation in the execution of two Anton Piller Orders.

John Stagliano Inc. v. Elmaleh, 2006 FC 585 (CanLII)

  • May 12, 2006

Date: 2006-05-12 Docket: T-1779-05. J. Gauthier J. | Link
"The plaintiffs now ask the Court to review the matter and to confirm that the Anton Piller Order was properly granted and that it was executed in accordance with its terms against the defendants Alain Elmaleh (Elmaleh), 144942 Canada Inc. (cob Kaytel Video Distribution) (Kaytel) and Leisure Time Canada Inc. (Leisure Time).